lecture3 notes

E they are rational 2 beliefs have to be consistent

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: about the other players’ actions is not assumed to be correct, but rather, simply constrained by rationality. Definition A belief of player i about the other players’ actions is a probability measure σ−i ∈ ∏j �=i Σj (recall that Σj denotes the set of probability measures over Sj , the set of actions of player j ). 18 Game Theory: Lecture 3 Mixed Strategy Equilibrium Rationality Rationality imposes two requirements on strategic behavior: (1) Players maximize with respect to some beliefs about opponent’s behavior (i.e., they are rational). (2) Beliefs have to be consistent with other players being rational, and being aware of each other’s rationality, and so on (but they need not be correct). Rational player i plays a best response to some belief σ−i . Since i thinks j is rational, he must be able to rationalize σ−i by thinking every action of j with σ−i (sj ) > 0 must be a best response to some belief j has. . . . Leads to an infinite regress: “I am playing strategy σ1 because I think player 2 is using σ2 , which is a reasonable belief because I would play it if I were � player 2 and I thought player 1 was using σ1 , which is a reasonable thing to � is a b est response to σ � , . . .. expect for player 2 because σ1 2 19 Game Theory: Lecture 3 Mixed Strategy Equilibrium Example Consider the game (from [Bernheim 84]), a1 a2 a3 a4 b1 0, 7 5, 2 7, 0 0, 0 b2 2, 5 3, 3 2, 5 0, −2 b3 7, 0 5, 2 0, 7 0, 0 b4 0, 1 0, 1 0, 1 10, −1 There is a unique Nash equilibrium (a2 , b2 ) in this game, i.e., the strategies a2 and b2 rationalize each other. Moreover, the strategies a1 , a3 , b1 , b3 can also be rationalized: Row will play a1 if Column plays b3 . Column will play b3 if Row plays a3 . Row will play a3 if Column plays b1 . Column will play b1 if Row plays a1 . However b4 cannot be rationalized, and since no rational player will play b4 , a4 can not be rationalized. 20 Game Theory: Lecture 3 Mixed Strategy Equilibrium Never-Best Response Strategies Example Consider the following game: Q X F Q 4, 2 1, 1 3, 0 F 0, 3 1, 0 2, 2 It can be seen that F can be rationalized. If player 1 believes that player 2 will play F, then playing F is rational for player 1, etc. However, playing X is never a best response, regardless of what strategy is chosen by the other player, since playing F always results in better payoffs. A strictly dominated strategy will never be a best response, regardless of a player’s beliefs about the other players’ actions. 21 Game Theory: Lecture 3 Mixed Strategy Equilibrium Never-Best Response and S...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/19/2014 for the course EECS 6.254 at MIT.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online